High-speed rail is on the right track

Dan Richard

Published 4:00 am, Wednesday, November 16, 2011

The High-Speed Rail Authority released a new business plan last month lauded as a practical, honest strategy to construct a statewide high-speed train system. The plan was praised by state elected officials, business groups, community leaders, the mayors of San Francisco, Fresno, Los Angeles and San Jose, and even this newspaper's editorial board.

This plan lays the foundation for a project that will address our growing transportation needs, connect California's population centers and create hundreds of thousands of jobs when we need them the most.

Still, a small number of critics suggests that the plan and this project are inconsistent with the voters' intent when they authorized a high-speed rail system in 2008 and are calling for a new vote. That step is neither required, practical nor good public policy.

First, the ballot measure's terms provided that bond funds would not be spent unless released by the Legislature. Thus, the voters already approved a built-in safety measure, leaving it to their elected representatives to review the plan without going back to the voters.

Second, sending the measure back to the ballot would mean not giving voters a choice at all. The very act would be tantamount to killing high-speed rail. We have the opportunity to use $3 billion of federal stimulus funds to start construction. Putting a measure on the ballot would obliterate that funding and the 100,000 jobs immediately available that go with it.

Third, it would set a bad precedent; would every school bond, highway bond, education bond, etc., be sent back to the voters just because circumstances changed?

Finally, one cannot ignore the irony, bordering on hypocrisy, of some who call for a new vote on high-speed rail. Many of these voices are the very ones who steadfastly refused to allow voters any choice on the immediate, severe budget problems facing the state; their claims now that the voice of the people must be heard seem somewhat hollow.

Most of the project's critics focus on cost. We recognize that the cost increases in the plan are sizable, but the plan also shows that there will be a return on this investment - that high-speed rail will be profitable even when the most conservative financial projections are applied.

Those who base their criticism on cost should be more alarmed by another figure in the plan: $171 billion. That's how much our state will have to spend to meet its transportation needs by midcentury if a high-speed rail system is not built. That's an additional 2,300 lane-miles of highways, four runways, and 115 airline gates.

Critics also point to ridership projections and private investment as stumbling blocks. However, based upon conservative ridership projections, revenues from the initial operating segment will be significant and will attract considerable private-sector capital investment to fund future construction. The initial operating segment will be decided in coming years.

Critics of the project also miss the mark in attacking the proposed phased implementation process. There has never been a large-scale transportation project that was built and paid for in one fell swoop. Rather, such as the Interstate Highway System, these projects are stretched out over long periods of time and completed in segments as funding becomes available.

The High-Speed Rail Business Plan is now subject to public comment and legislative review. That process respects the will of the voters and offers the path to a 21st century transportation system for California.

Latest from the SFGATE homepage:

Click below for the top news from around the Bay Area and beyond. Sign up for our newsletters to be the first to learn about breaking news and more. Go to 'Sign In' and 'Manage Profile' at the top of the page.